Zone1 For Christians who believe in Darwinian evolution, question

[Clyde 154]

Do most Christians agree with you?

I think it's something that needs to be investigated more completely.

Offhand my rough guess is that it's about 50/50 in America as a whole, but could vary to as high as 75% not being literal believers in the more progressive states to as much as 75% being literal believers in the more conervative southern states.

As Paul said, does it matter if MEN agree? Why is it that some present the logical fallacy that a "consensus opinion" makes something a fact? To quote the Apostle Paul, "Do I now persuade men, or God? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." -- Gal. 1:10

It was a "scientific consesus" in the middle ages that the sun revolved around the earth....with the earth being the center of the universe. Before that it was a scientific consesus that the earth was flat.....etc., What makes today's consensus opinions any more truthful than the previous consensus' of history?

Do the holy scriptures present the Creation Narrative in Genesis as either allegory or metaphorical? No. Does the Christ or the teachings of the Apostles of Christ present Genesis as allegory or metaphor? No. Should a Christian then pretend that Genesis is presenting an allegory in order to please men's consensus opinion? No. A Christian should "serve" the Godhead, not men. Should a Christian accept only portions of the word of God as truth and reject others as simply being allegorical or metaphorical when they refuse to accept the scripture as literal truth when the context, content and subject matter present it to be truth? The entire Bible was inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17), if one portion of it is not inerrant.....then all of it is based upon error and worthless in establishing Christian Doctrine.

The very word Christian establishes His church and how one should serve the Christ and accept His teachings as truth. How can you be a Christian and disagree with the Christ? Christ spoke explictly with no ambiguity whatsoever regarding Creation. He declared, "But from the beginning of creation MALE AND FEMALE HE (GOD) MADE THEM........" -- Mark 10:6

What does this text point out? (1) the first couple were MADE; they were not biological accidents. The verb used in the orginal Greek implies ACTION, not progressive development. (2) The Apostle in the Book of Cor. 12:48 agrees, the original pair of humans were fashioned "male and female". (3) Adam and Eve as the first humans existed from the beginning of creation. Again the orginal Greek word "arche'" is used in absolute terms....meaning that man and woman have existed since the beginning of creation. (4).......in the beginning........used with explaining the origins of man and woman, makes it clear that there were no BILLIONS of years between the creation of all things to include the earth, the heavens, the sun and the moon....and lastly man. As the Christ and the Apostle stated, "........in the beginning, male and female made He them....."

We are to believe that God can do many wonderous and miraculous things.........from the spiritual realm of heaven, but He is not capable of speaking new creations into existence? He must comply with the laws of physics that He created to regulate His creations? That implies a LACK OF FAITH. If God must comply with the laws of physics.....then the laws of physics should be able to define and explain..........how the universe created itself WITHOUT A CAUSE.......how life evolved from dead matter.......how life once deceased can be regenerated(borught back to life) as demonstrated in scripture. If God is limited by physics......then physics should be able to present FACTUAL, ABSOLUTE EVIDENCES of the above mysteries that still exist today only by hypothesis, conjecture, assumptions, speculations and theory, IDEAS, not facts in evidence that create a LAW.

So........the answer to your question? Do I agree with the Christ? Yes, as a Christian I am commanded to worship in SPIRIT and TRUTH, obeying the word of God, it being TRUTH, truth that we as Christians are to be "sanctified" in......(John 4:23, 17:17) Do I believe the "IDEAS" of men or the WORD OF GOD? I believe God.

 

[Donald H]

As Paul said, does it matter if MEN agree? Why is it that some present the logical fallacy that a "consensus opinion" makes something a fact? To quote the Apostle Paul, "Do I now persuade men, or God? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." -- Gal. 1:10

Do the holy scriptures present the Creation Narrative in Genesis as either allegory or metaphorical? No. Does the Christ or the teachings of the Apostles of Christ present Genesis as allegory or metaphor? No. Should a Christian then pretend that Genesis is presenting an allegory in order to please men's consensus opinion? No. A Christian should "serve" the Godhead, not men. Should a Christian accept only portions of the word of God as truth and reject others as simply being allegorical or metaphorical when they refuse to accept the scripture as literal truth when the context, content and subject matter present it to be truth? The entire Bible was inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17), if one portion of it is not inerrant.....then all of it is based upon error and worthless in establishing Christian Doctrine.

The very word Christian establishes His church and how one should serve the Christ and accept His teachings as truth. How can you be a Christian and disagree with the Christ? Christ spoke explictly with no ambiguity whatsoever regarding Creation. He declared, "But from the beginning of creation MALE AND FEMALE HE (GOD) MADE THEM........" -- Mark 10:6

What does this text point out? (1) the first couple were MADE; they were not biological accidents. The verb used in the orginal Greek implies ACTION, not progressive development. (2) The Apostle in the Book of Cor. 12:48 agrees, the original pair of humans were fashioned "male and female". (3) Adam and Eve as the first humans existed from the beginning of creation. Again the orginal Greek word "arche'" is used in absolute terms....meaning that man and woman have existed since the beginning of creation. (4).......in the beginning........used with explaining the origins of man and woman, makes it clear that there were no BILLIONS of years between the creation of all things to include the earth, the heavens, the sun and the moon....

So........the answer to your question? Do I agree with the Christ? Yes, as a Christian I am commanded to worship in SPIRIT and TRUTH, and the word of God being TRUTH, truth that we as Christians are to be "sanctified" in......(John 4:23, 17:17)

None of that gets us any closer to answering the question on how many Christians are literal believers in their bibles, and how many have moved on to accepting Darwinian evolution?

Meriweather promoted the idea that 20% were literal believers and he attempted to say that has always been static and unchanging. I have pursued evidence to show that the literal believers in 1900 were close to 80%.

Can we go slowly and answer the questions one at a time?

 

[Donald H]

As Paul said, does it matter if MEN agree? Why is it that some present the logical fallacy that a "consensus opinion" makes something a fact? To quote the Apostle Paul, "Do I now persuade men, or God? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." -- Gal. 1:10

It was a "scientific consesus" in the middle ages that the sun revolved around the earth....with the earth being the center of the universe. Before that it was a scientific consesus that the earth was flat.....etc., What makes today's consensus opinions any more truthful than the previous consensus' of history?

Do the holy scriptures present the Creation Narrative in Genesis as either allegory or metaphorical? No. Does the Christ or the teachings of the Apostles of Christ present Genesis as allegory or metaphor? No. Should a Christian then pretend that Genesis is presenting an allegory in order to please men's consensus opinion? No. A Christian should "serve" the Godhead, not men. Should a Christian accept only portions of the word of God as truth and reject others as simply being allegorical or metaphorical when they refuse to accept the scripture as literal truth when the context, content and subject matter present it to be truth? The entire Bible was inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17), if one portion of it is not inerrant.....then all of it is based upon error and worthless in establishing Christian Doctrine.

The very word Christian establishes His church and how one should serve the Christ and accept His teachings as truth. How can you be a Christian and disagree with the Christ? Christ spoke explictly with no ambiguity whatsoever regarding Creation. He declared, "But from the beginning of creation MALE AND FEMALE HE (GOD) MADE THEM........" -- Mark 10:6

It's far from that simple and to suggest it's so is to impose more restrictions and conditions on the flock than I as an atheist would ask for.

Everybody has moved on and are qualifying that which is to be believed in the bibles as the word of the god. Just ask a sampling of Christians to define that which is the word of god and which is not to be accepted as such!

Can it be the fault of those who wrote the bibles and the fact that they had no way to copy the bibles other than to hand write copies thousands of times? Thus producing the thousandth copy that isn't even remotely similar to the original?

 

[presonorek]

I am in the I don’t know category. I’m ok joining every single human being who has ever lived that doesn’t know. We need to accept that we just don’t know because that’s how it will be.

 

[buttercup]

It's a difficult question for a Christian who also "believes" in Darwinian evolution.

Atheists love such Christians because such Christians start the debate about origins by immediately conceding.

The flaw in "Christian Darwinism" is that accepting a completely naturalistic explanation for life on Earth means imagining an all knowing omnipotent God that watched from the sidelines as life formed from no life and eventually developed into millions of species, one of which is humanity.

Then . . . this heretofore inactive God decides that humans will be given souls and a set of rules and that He will take human form to walk among them in order to protect them from the consequences of breaking those rules.

Of course there are some who try to find middle ground by saying "well God invented evolution by natural selection." If you believe that, then congratulations! You are an intelligent design creationist.

E by NS is certainly well designed if it is real and if it came from God then He created it. Those atheists you want to impress with your scientific modernism dont respect that idea any more than they do a literal Adam and Eve. They may pretend they do, but in reality they're just glad you gave up so easily.

Don't believe me? Try telling one of them that science teachers should mention thst Darwinism doesn't exclude God because it is possible that God is/was behind it.

Be prepared for a reaction that resembles a rabid dog.

I used to believe in evolution, in my B.C days. But only because it was what I was taught as a child...and for a long time I didn't really question it. Now I think that evolution is one of the biggest lies ever perpetuated on mankind.

I agree with you that atheists love Christians who are evolutionists, for the reason you stated. To me it doesn't make any sense at all to believe in both God and evolution (at least the type of evolution they believe in.) It completely contradicts the Bible and it I think it's silly to think that God would bring about humans in that way. But that's just how I see it. If others want to believe that, I guess it doesn't really matter because it's not an issue that affects one's salvation.

 

[Donald H]

I am in the I don’t know category. I’m ok joining every single human being who has ever lived that doesn’t know. We need to accept that we just don’t know because that’s how it will be.

You can at least know that it matters a lot on which faith you adopt. Why would any Christian say it doesn't matter?

It could only be due to ignorance on what some of the other religious faiths dictate must be practiced!

Japan's state Shintoism during WW2??

 

[Donald H]

I used to believe in evolution, in my B.C days. But only because it was what I was taught as a child...and for a long time I didn't really question it. Now I think that evolution is one of the biggest lies ever perpetuated on mankind.

I agree with you that atheists love Christians who are evolutionists, for the reason you stated. To me it doesn't make any sense at all to believe in both God and evolution (at least the type of evolution they believe in.) It completely contradicts the Bible and it I think it's silly to think that God would bring about humans in that way. But that's just how I see it. If others want to believe that, I guess it doesn't really matter because it's not an issue that affects one's salvation.

You're dead right about one thing!
It doesn't make sense to believe in both god and evolution.
But Meriweather claims that it doesn't make sense to only 20% of Christians.

And so that's one of the questions to which we're trying to find some answers.

 

[buttercup]

You're dead right about one thing!
It doesn't make sense to believe in both god and evolution.
But Meriweather claims that it doesn't make sense to only 20% of Christians.

And so that's one of the questions to which we're trying to find some answers.

Merriweather is Catholic, and in my experience most Catholics have a very different perspective when it comes to the bible, and a number of doctrines and issues. I know a lot of Christians and I can't think of ANY who agree with evolution. But I have encountered Catholic Christians who believe in both God and evolution. In fact, one time I remember meeting a few (through my cousin, who is Catholic) who sort of even mocked my belief in creationism and wanted to argue with me about evolution. Again, it's not a salvific issue, so if they want to believe their great-great-great-etc grandfather was a monkey, they can have at it! lolol

 

[Donald H]

Merriweather is Catholic, and in my experience most Catholics have a very different perspective when it comes to the bible, and a number of doctrines and issues. I know a lot of Christians and I can't think of ANY who agree with evolution. But I have encountered Catholic Christians who believe in both God and evolution. In fact, one time I remember meeting a few (through my cousin, who is Catholic) who sort of even mocked my belief in creationism and wanted to argue with me about evolution. Again, it's not a salvific issue, so if they want to believe their great-great-great-etc grandfather was a monkey, they can have at it! lolol

I suspect that the % of Christians who take their bibles literally could be somewhat more than Meri's claim of 20%.

You and others are hinting at that.

Evolution doesn't claim that somebody's great grandfather was a monkey. The claim being made is that we are related to the apes through what Christians would refer to as a 'missing link'.

There is no missing link. Would you like to learn more?

 

[Meriweather]

Merriweather is Catholic, and in my experience most Catholics have a very different perspective when it comes to the bible, and a number of doctrines and issues. I know a lot of Christians and I can't think of ANY who agree with evolution. But I have encountered Catholic Christians who believe in both God and evolution. In fact, one time I remember meeting a few (through my cousin, who is Catholic) who sort of even mocked my belief in creationism and wanted to argue with me about evolution. Again, it's not a salvific issue, so if they want to believe their great-great-great-etc grandfather was a monkey, they can have at it! lolol

Yes, but I explained earlier my Catholic grandmother's view was we did not evolve from monkeys, we evolved from a fish. Evolution does not say we evolved from monkeys--just the opposite that people did not evolve from monkeys. We both probably had a common ancestor at some point, but the lines diverged eons ago. The theory is that all life on earth perhaps came from a common cell. Remember, this is all theory, and as we can see as far back as my grandmother's day, as long as Catholics believe creation is under the guidance of God the Creator, it matters not if some Catholics believe creation happened in six 24-hour days and others believe it took place over time.

By the way, I never said twenty percent of Catholics believe in evolution; someone in this thread is mistaken on that point. What I said is that only 24% of Americans take the Bible literally. That was five years ago. I don't know if there is more recent research on this. A little over one-fifth (26%) of Catholics are straight six-day Creationists; the other four-fifths take evolution into account. Popes have said and then reiterated doesn't matter what belief Catholics hold on this.

 

[buttercup]

Evolution doesn't claim that somebody's great grandfather was a monkey. The claim being made is that we are related to the apes through what Christians would refer to as a 'missing link'.

There is no missing link. Would you like to learn more?

I was joking in that monkey comment, obviously, I wasn't making an actual claim.

Oh my word. And now Merriweather also thought I was being literal.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yes, but I explained earlier my Catholic grandmother's view was we did not evolve from monkeys, we evolved from a fish

So you reject the BIBLICAL ACCOUNT that Man was a unique creation of God.

Catholics want it both ways. It's time to believe Jesus who always gave His approval to the Biblical account. Remember, He revealed HIMSELF as the I AM who knew Moses, Abraham and Adam personally. If you reject that for the fables of Man, the Spirit of Christ is not with you

 

[buttercup]

as long as Catholics believe creation is under the guidance of God the Creator, it matters not if some Catholics believe creation happened in six 24-hour days and others believe it took place over time.

I already said that, twice. (that it's not a salvific issue) So I'm not sure why you felt the need to say that to me.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

as long as Catholics believe creation is under the guidance of God the Creator, it matters not if some Catholics believe creation happened in six 24-hour days and others believe it took place over time

It absolutely DOES matter. You cannot have it both ways. God said what He said, and Jesus stood by every word of Scripture as did the apostles.

It's time to get off the fence and stop flirting with paganism as your Catholic ancestors have always done

 

[Donald H]

By the way, I never said twenty percent of Catholics believe in evolution; someone in this thread is mistaken on that point. What I said is that only 24% of Americans take the Bible literally.

It was me that said that you said: 20% of catholics believe in evolution. I consider that to be the rough equivalent of
24% of Americans take the Bible literally.

Equivalent in that the number is likely acceptable for catholics in all countries.

I also quoted you saying 20% and not 24%. The 4% isn't worth my time to debate. I'll accept your 24% with thanks.

Much more to the point is that you maintained that hadn't changed over many years, and then I went on to show that the per centage had changed considerable from 1900 when the literal believers would have been close to 80%.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Jesus spoke of the Old Testament in terms of actual history. He believed that the people mentioned actually existed and the events recorded truly occurred. These include: Adam and Eve (Matthew 19), Jonah and the great sea monster (Matthew 12), and Noah and the Flood (Matthew 24). There is not the slightest hint that Jesus cast doubt on any of the stories contained in the Old Testament

 

[Donald H]

It absolutely DOES matter. You cannot have it both ways. God said what He said, and Jesus stood by every word of Scripture as did the apostles.

It's time to get off the fence and stop flirting with paganism as your Catholic ancestors have always done

In fairness to Meri, he has presented an argument to say that the Catholics can indeed have it both ways.

But further to that, he lied about the per centage of literal believers in his bibles, not changing over the years.

He maintains 20-24% while the truth is that it was close to 80% in 1900.

May his god grant him the courage to run away from the discussion, on the lame excuse of me being patronizing.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

In fairness to Meri, he has presented an argument to say that the Catholics can indeed have it both ways.

But further to that, he lied about the per centage of literal believers in his bibles, not changing over the years.

He maintains 20-24% while the truth is that it was close to 80% in 1900.

May his god grant him the courage to run away from the discussion, on the lame excuse of me being patronizing.

Who is "he"?

 

[Donald H]

Jesus spoke of the Old Testament in terms of actual history. He believed that the people mentioned actually existed and the events recorded truly occurred. These include: Adam and Eve (Matthew 19), Jonah and the great sea monster (Matthew 12), and Noah and the Flood (Matthew 24). There is not the slightest hint that Jesus cast doubt on any of the stories contained in the Old Testament

Well stated and factually true. Any attempts to say otherwise are simply attempts at damage control over modern understanding brought about by modern science.

 

[Meriweather]

Oh my word. And now Merriweather also thought I was being literal.

I did? Shrug. I merely brought up what my grandmother would say when someone made a monkey comment. I thought you just brought up that people could believe what they want?

Again, it's not a salvific issue, so if they want to believe their great-great-great-etc grandfather was a monkey, they can have at it! lolol

If you did not literally mean that people could believe what they want, I will try to remember that next time.